española

Greece on the Edge

“Greek citizens, we are facing a historic responsibility to not let the struggles and sacrifices of the Greek people be in vain, and to strengthen democracy and our national sovereignty—and this responsibility weighs upon us. Our responsibility for our country’s future. This responsibility obliges us to respond to the ultimatum based on the sovereign will of the Greek people”. With these words Alexis Tsipras, Prime Minister of Greece, in a surprise move announced a referendum to decide whether or not Greece is to accept the bailout conditions proposed jointly by the European Commission, the International Monetary Fund and the European Central Bank, which is going to take place on 5 July 2015.

Since late 2009 the so called “Greek debt crisis” started with the newly elected Prime Minister George Papandreou facing a major challenge so early in his mandate. On 23rd of April 2010, the Greek government requested an EU/IMF bailout package to be activated, and signed the First Economic Adjustment Programme. A second bailout package followed on 1st of March 2012 and triggered huge social turmoil. The economic and social effects of these austerity programmes impoverished the Greek society. The unemployment rate stands above 25%, GDP suffered its worst decline and the debt is totally unsustainable.

Papandreou was the first that announced a referendum to let people vote if they agree or not with the bailout programmes and austerity measures in November 2011. He decided to cancel the referendum and resign after an intense summit in Cannes and the international pressure he faced mostly by the French President Nicolas Sarkozy. A few days later Lucas Papademos, an economist, became the first technocrat Prime Minister of Greece.

Four years Later, Tsipras’ referendum has a great importance for the country and will shape its future. The question is: Should the plan of agreement, which was submitted by the European Commission, the ECB, and the IMF in the Eurogroup meeting of 25th of June 2015 and comprises two parts, which constitute their unified proposal, be accepted? The first document is entitled “Reforms for the Completion of the Current Program and Beyond” and the second “Preliminary Debt Sustainability Analysis”. Voters should decide if they approve (YES) or not (NO) this proposal. The first reactions were mixed as many supported the referendum as a valuable democratic tool and others stated that it is unnecessary or the question is not clear enough. Many criticized the short electoral deadlines too.

A few days after the announcement Greece became the first developed country to fail to make an IMF €1.6 billion loan repayment on June 30. Banks closed and people are queuing at ATMs and gas stations terrified by the prospect of a possible bankruptcy. The media (especially the private owned television networks) contributed to this and didn’t fulfill their role ruining polyphony and impartiality. YES campaign rally was given more than 47 minutes during the news shows, while the NO campaign rally was given only 8 minutes. The same occurred with representativeness of the two campaigns as mainly pro-YES politicians/artists/journalists were invited to television panels.

Although the question of the referendum is clear for the citizens, it is interpreted very differently by international institutions and politicians. The great involvement of European institutions in the electoral process demonstrates the lack of core democratic values by today’s European leaders. European Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker urged Greeks “not to commit suicide out of fear of death” and asked them to “vote YES, regardless of the question that is ultimately put to them”! Many interpret the question as a YES/NO to the eurozone, while others extend it to YES/NO to the European Union. This is the main argument of the opposition parties (New Democracy, The River, PASOK) who call voters to support YES in order to remain part of Europe and the eurozone although SYRIZA’s government has clarified that has no intention to leave either the EU or the eurozone.

Greeks are deeply divided! They have two options: to vote for accepting EU and IMF’s harsh ultimatums which will continue the austerity that has heavily damaged the economy during the previous years, or to vote for breaking up with the lenders which will have unknown consequences. Regardless their vote, they feel betrayed by the European leaders that showed no solidarity or patience. The newly elected government faced unprecedented pressure to accept and implement embarrassing austerity measures that would never put an end to the recession or foster development.

Many of the YES voters are misled by the spurious dilemma about Greece’s future in the EU and the eurozone. It is remarkable that most of them are high-class members and middle-aged who fear for the future of their businesses’ or high pensions. If YES wins on Sunday night then new austerity bailout packages will be imposed affecting more directly wages, pensions and taxes. Greece will remain by all costs in the eurozone not as a core member that will influence the decisions, but as an “ill-state” unable to follow the growing economy of the rest of eurozone.

Except the financial consequences, a YES result will mean political changes as the current cabinet is not willing to impose such unpopular measures. Martin Schulz, President of the European Parliament, told German Handelsblatt that “new elections would be necessary if the Greek people vote for the reform programme and thus for remaining in the eurozone and Tsipras, as a logical consequence, resigns” and concluded that what is needed is “a technocratic government, so that we can continue to negotiate”! Schulz’s statement was badly criticized even by his European comrades for his misplaced comments and partiality. This statement also vindicates SYRIZA’s allegation that opposition parties and European institutions have allied for a “regime change” in Greece and could be a message to Spanish voters who support Podemos for the upcoming elections later in November this year.

But what will happen if NO wins finally? The optimistic scenario (and the most probable) is that Tsipras will negotiate again with the EU and IMF having greater popular acceptance and strength which will play in his favor. The pessimistic scenario is that a Grexit happens and Greece leaves the eurozone (or the EU too). Most of the NO voters are pro-EU and do not wish a Grexit. They support a more fair political system in Greece that fights corruption and cronyism and they hope to create a new EU, based more on solidarity and not on financial issues. They consist mainly of young-aged “revolutionist” that dream a European Union of 28 (or more) strong equal states that take decisions by consensus and do not impose the law of the strongest.

Either divided Greeks vote for YES or NO, one thing is clear: Monday is a very crucial day. Both ways are full of obstacles and challenges and Greeks cannot afford recession for much more years. It is not only matter of economy, but turns out also as a matter of dignity! The austerity suffered so far and the EU’s rigid policy have had destructive influence in the Greek society. If things don’t change then we should expect greater rise of extremism and no one knows the final result this would have. Democracy, logic and prudence must prevail once again.

Associate

Dimitris Makrystathis is currently the President of Youthnet Hellas and member of the Advisory Council on Youth at the Council of Europe. He is an experienced youth leader and activist involved in many international organizations and projects. He has experience on blogging and citizen journalism. His interests include new technology, politics, reading, blogging, youth consulting, sports and traveling.

Education

Computer Engineering & Informatics, University of Patras

Languages

English, German, Greek

Email This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

Follow Us

Get Published

+ Archives

Legal Note

opensocietyoline.com includes links to both internal and external websites which are selected to be editorially relevant to the content they are linking from. Open Society Online cannot be held responsible for the content of external links, third party content that is published on the website or cited references.